Two different groups of hydroxyapatite (HA) coated and uncoated porous titanium implants, 250–350 μm and 500–700 μm diameter beads, were press-fit in femoral canine cancellous bone. After 12 weeks, the dogs were euthanized and histomorphometric backscattered electron microscopy studies were carried out. Comparing HA-coated versus uncoated implants in the 250–350 μm bead diameter group percentage of bone (P=0.01) and bone index (P=0.01), were higher in the HA-coated implants. Comparing HA-coated versus uncoated implants in the 500–700 μm bead diameter group bone ingrowth (P=0.01) and bone depth penetration (P=0.008), were higher in HA-coated samples. It can be concluded that the HA coating was an effective method to improve bone formation and ingrowth in the porous implants.
CoventryM.B.. Historical perspective of hip arthroplasty. In: MorreyB.F. ed. Joint Replacement Arthroplasty.New York: Churchill Livingstone Inc1991: 491–9.
2.
JudetR., SiguierM., BrumptB., JudetTh. Prosthese totale de la hanche en poro-metal sans ciment.Rev Chir Orthop1978; 64 (Suppl 2): S14–21.
3.
LordG.A., HardyJ.R., KummerF.J.. An uncemented total hip replacement: Experimental study and review of 300 madreporique arthroplasties.Clin Orthop1979; 141: 2–16.
4.
MittelmeierH., HarmsG.. Present day state of cement-free anchoring of combined ceramics-metal prostheses.Z Orthop1979; 117: 478–81.
5.
EnghC.A.. Hip arthroplasty with a Moore prosthesis with porous coating: A five-year study.Clin Orthop1983; 176: 52–66.
6.
GalanteJ.O., RiveroD.P.. The biological basis for bone ingrowth in titanium fiber composites. In: HarrisW.H. ed. Advanced concepts in total hip replacement.Slack Inc, Thorofare, 1985: 135–58.
7.
CollierJ.P., MayorM.B., ChaeJ.C., SurprenantV.A., SurprenantH.P., DauphinaisL.A.. Macroscopic and microscopic evidence of prosthetic fixation with porous-coated materials.Clin Orthop1988; 235: 173–80.
8.
CookS.D., ThomasK.A., HaddadR.J.. Histological analysis of retrieved human porous-coated joint component.Clin Orthop1988; 234: 90–101.
9.
TracyB.M., DoremusR.H.. Direct electron microscopy studies of the bone-hydroxylapatite interface.J Biomed Mater Res1984; 18: 719–26.
10.
GeesinkR.G.T.. Hydroxyapatite-coated total hip prostheses. Two-year clinical and roentgenographic results of 100 cases.Clin Orthop1990; 261: 39–58.
GeesinkR.G.T., de GrootK., KleinCPAT. Bonding of bone to apatite-coated implants.J Bone Joint Surg1988; 70-B: 17–22.
15.
OonishiH., YamamotoM., IshhnaruH.. The effect of hydroxyapatite coating on bone growth into porous titanium alloy implants.J Bone Joint Surg1989; 71-B: 213–16.
16.
SumnerD.R., RiveroD.P., SkiporA.K., GalanteJ.O.. The relationship between bone ingrowth and strength and the stiffness of the bone-implant interface.Trans Soc Bio-mat1986; 9: 69.
17.
BachusK.N., HofmannA.A., DautermanL.A.. Canine and human cancellous bone ingrowth into cobalt chrome and titanium porous coated implants. A backscattered electron microscopic analysis.Trans 34th Ann Mtg, Orthopaedic Research Society, Atlanta, GA, 1988; 13: 308.
18.
BloebaumR.D., BachusK.N., BoyceT.M.. Backscattered electron imaging: the role in calcified tissue and implant analysis.J Biomater Appl1990; 5: 56–85.
19.
SumnerD.R., BryanJ.M., UrbanR.M., KuszakJ.R.. Measuring the volume fraction of bone ingrowth: A comparison of three techniques.J Orthop Res1990; 8: 448–52.
20.
WhitehouseW.J.. Errors in area measurements in thick sections, with special reference to trabecular bone.J Microsc1976; 107: 183–7.
21.
HolmesR.E., HaglerH.K., ColettaC.A.. Thick-section histometry of porous hydroxyapatite implants using backscattered electron imaging.J Biomed Mater Res1987; 21: 731–9.
22.
ThomasK.A., KayJ.F., CookS.T., JarchoM.J.. The effect of surface macrotexture and hydroxylapatite coating on the mechanical strengths and histologic profiles of titanium implant materials.J Biomed Mater Res1987; 21: 1395–414.
